Citations added later. And the extreme amount of editing and spell-checking.

Birth defects in pregnancy primarilly can be traced to several causes.

1.Nutritional Deficiencies.

2.Drug abuse.

3. Pollution in the area

Nothing can be done about 3 besides installing a large amount of air filters in the home or moving to a different area.

Those are the two primary causes of malformations found after birth. Here are some things people think are linked, but are not as directly linked.

4. Severe insomnia

5. Great lack of exercise.

However, depression, in and of itself, has not been linked to malformations and similar later in life, in and of itself, besides the genetics of someone depressed making it so someone will be more prone to depression later in life.

So, for antidepressants to be argued to possibly help the infants health, it must directly combat the first two, and possibly do something for 4 and 5. The bad effects of a so called "untreated depression" must go into these.

How of course, do people argue that adding antidepressants combats the first two? If someone is deemed responsible enough to consistently take the pill, which they must be more alert in consistency then ususal which is already considered to need that a good deal, then they are responsible enough to take a multivitamin or a some 300 calorie nutrition pudding/blend morning and night.

For the second, its considered bad practice to add additional meds on top of fighting a drug problem, besides those specifically added to counter withdrawal symptomes, such as benzoes for alcohol and perhaps a temporary antipsychotic. Those adding antidepressants in the second case are considered by many well, to be shills after a buck. Sure its done to some patients, but so is polypharmacy with similar types of medications, also a no-no done by scammers.

And of course, if an antidepressant is strong and euphoric enough to coutner drug abuse like opium or alcohol, won't it also have its own strong share of side effects?

The only drug I am aware of being offered to specifically reduce the consumption of another one is budipronon(wellbutrin) and that of reducing nicotine consomption. Though, with the high chances of relapse, its best to simply recomend one not getting pregnant until off the drugs.

So it coutnering the first two are false. First by the absurdity of giving someone a serious med who can't even be trusted to take a multivitamin consistently, second due to above meotioned. These things are simply not prescribed to aid in the reduction of the consumption of those drugs on a responsible basis. Some shrinks will do it, but some will prescribe the kitchen sink for more kick-backs and vacations too.

As for the second two, adding drugs to aid in sleep in teh first place amongst pregnant women is not considered a good thing. Its much more supported to find social supprot, different jobs and the like.

As for exercise, as antidepressants have some side effects like greater dizzyness, its utterly questionable to not prescribe only exercise as of itself, and due to antidepressents low utility and risk of sides, is considered best practice to be the first thing to rpescribe(as most behavioral interventions are). Its simply not the case of that in america because that's how doctors get paid more.

Considering how exercise *works* just as well as these antidepressants (which by the way, don't work much better then active placebo in the first place, and long-term studies are all horribly marred by a large host of issues) this one is best accomplished by directly prescribing exercise itself. Two-3 sessions of 15-20 min a day is doable. Or a session of 30 minutes a day is doable.

So for the things that directly, and for those that are not as closely linked, antidepressants simply can't do anything about, except in some (Well obviously *happier*(not much better then active placebo) people are more likely to do properly!). If someone can take an antidepressant consistently, they can take a multivitamin consistently.

isn't is absurd what people

So why prescribe them at all in the population? Its commonly said that if a woman commits suicide both her and the baby are dead....but look!

For starters, look at how weasly the support is for these decreasing the suicide rate. When directly comparing it to placebo, it looks horrible. In order to get good results, it looks at everyone in the nation not even on them, and compares national trends that way. With the large amount of variables, its like showing that the sales of a car decreases cancer because when it was being sold a lot, cancer rates were down.

But great. When directly comparing it to placebo in adults, its bad.

Why to never prescribe them? Simple, withdrawal at infancy.

"hese risks appear to be higher if medications with shorter half-lives are abruptly discontinued.26 Furthermore, findings from some studies indicate that antidepressant discontinuation is associated with increased risk of suicide.27"

Insert more.

This is known as withdrawal, and how serious it is for something on its entire life to abrubtly go off these drugs! Of course, the people gettig paid for this will use the shoody long term studies to support giving an infant injectible SSRI's for the rest of its life to suddenly get two patients.

As it causes extreme withdrawal at the moment of birth, or withdrawal in the womb going off of them, that's really bad. Sudden withdrawal is thought to prompt cases of mental illness in adults with fully developed brains, let alone children already developing.

Hell, the reason "going off your antidepressants" all of a sudden is such a problem is because of withdrawal, and clearly not due to the protective effects of teh drugs themselves, as total suicide vs placebo studies will show. Why risk going on them at all then?

Studies of them in children.

The yougner you are, the worse antideprssants look for you in general. More studies.

Insert more

So great. The long term studies on depression are bad, and really marred by practices like pharma companies discontinuing studies for questionable reasons(such as getting poor results). The results on it decreasing suicide rates on woman of childbearing age are really really really bad.

Sure, it may well work for 6 weeks. But remember, so will caffiene and a cup of coffee in the morning for those who have not drinkedn coffe yet.

With the already suggested risk, in a field where there have been so many statistical slights of hand with these studies, and plenty of cases of poor study control even in children, with their very low utility above exercise, best to just ban them in this case. And probably never prescribe them outside of that too with their sides, but I digress.

Its interesting of a topic enough. Its interesting how Penn and Teller put on their entertaining video series Bullshit! about how banning GMO's is tantamoutn to making people in poor countries starve, and just a few montsh ago Venezuala passed a much stricter GMO bill(I have not read it fully yet) then what they had before and the country is starving.

http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/05/venezuela-bans-gmos/

Good job! If Penn and Teller ever renew their series or do a best-of DVD series with a new commentary at the beginning of the shows showing how they changed over time, that link may well be the first thing they mention!

Right now I wonder. If the first world can't quite find a sustainable way for energy distribution, or isn't willing to pursue the technologies in time, then I would bet that banning GMO research is flat out the dumbest thing the coutry could possibly do for the future. I have been seeing some interesting research/suggestions that crops like rice could be nutritious for half the total resources or less as its normal variety.

With the possibilities of much more food for the same resources, banning GMO research is horribly self defeating for a Green person to do.

"But there is nothing like Islam at this momeny for generating this kind of intelorance and chaos.And if only a right wing demagogue will speak honestly about it, then we will elect right-wing demagogues in the west more and more in response to it. And that will be the price of political correctness. That is when this check will finally get cashed. That will be the consquence of this persistant failure we see among liberals, to speak and think and act with real moral clarity and courage on this issue"

"The way these events[terrorist attacks] have kindled xenophobia and racism has been totally unsurprising, and this transformation of our country is unfolding with each new cycle."

"What were getting from the left is just sanctiomony and charges of bigotry against people who are not bigots, who are anything but bigots. And I am not talking about trump. I am talking about the millions of epople who may be tempted to vote for him, because their common sense is being demonized and defied at every turn on this issue...;.it leaves these people with nowhere to turn besides the right-wing party"

https://youtu.be/2YCWf0tHy7M?list=WL​

Though, its the job of the president to be a peace-maker, and its probably not the best idea to stoke religios passions against moderates. So sure, I agree with the current presidents verbal approach of not mentioning islam well enough, (in this link*, and in basic history textbooks, there are clearly no lack of right-wing psychoes willing to do the exact same thing to people of islamic origin, more or less making it inhumane to those in the country already)

but what does it say about immigration policy? A need for caution, I would say. Don't take it from me or Harris, take it from Lee Quan Yew, former prime minister of Singapore who managed to bring a society that people would thought falter due to ethnic tensions and made it the best country in the world on numerous measures of safety and prosperity!

"“I think we were progressing very nicely until the surge of Islam came, and if you asked me for my observations, the other communities have easier integration - friends, intermarriages and so on, Indians with Chinese, Chinese with Indians - than Muslims. That’s the result of the surge from the Arab states."

"He also said: “I think the Muslims socially do not cause any trouble, but they are distinct and separate.”"

a--Not surprising for a religion that stones to death from a Fatwas on those who leave and speak out against it!